Text integral 
Procedură : 2015/2128(INI)
Stadiile documentului în şedinţă
Stadii ale documentului : A8-0026/2016

Texte depuse :


Dezbateri :

PV 07/03/2016 - 15
CRE 07/03/2016 - 15

Voturi :

PV 08/03/2016 - 6.5
Explicaţii privind voturile

Texte adoptate :


Stenograma dezbaterilor
Luni, 7 martie 2016 - Strasbourg Ediţie revizuită

15. Raportul anual pe 2014 privind protejarea intereselor financiare ale UE – combaterea fraudei (dezbatere)
Înregistrare video a intervenţiilor

  La Présidente. – L'ordre du jour appelle le débat sur le rapport de Benedek Jávor, au nom de la commission du contrôle budgétaire, sur le rapport annuel 2014 sur la protection des intérêts financiers de l'UE – Lutte contre la fraude (2015/2128(INI)) (A8-0026/2016).


  Benedek Jávor, rapporteur. Madam President, the report on the protection of the EU’s financial interests is one of the most important reports that we discuss on a yearly basis here in Parliament. Not only because this is about money, a lot of public money, but also because in the troubled times that we have right now, building back confidence in EU institutions is a key issue for the European institutions and for every responsible European politician. We have to assure citizens of the European Union that their money is used properly, is transparent and is spent in a way which is in line with the EU regulation.

The report which we discuss on a yearly basis generally mirrors the opinion of the Commission and this year we had a good and quite detailed report. Of course Parliament as usual has its own priorities and issues to be raised in the debate.

The report we voted on in the Committee on Budgetary Control (CONT) has wide backing from different political groups and was voted for almost unanimously in the CONT Committee. Basically we concentrate on two levels of protection of the EU’s financial interests.

The first is protection of the revenue of the European Union, the own resources of the EU. From this perspective I think that it is very important to emphasise that VAT fraud is clearly an EU competence as VAT is part of the EU own resource system. The VAT gap is varying too not only at European level but also at Member State level. The VAT gap reached EUR 168 billion in 2013. So we welcome that the Commission supports a strong PIF directive, including VAT in the scope, but we have also to include it in the directive or the regulation on the European Public Prosecutor’s Office to be effective.

A couple of days ago too the European Court of Auditors published a special report on VAT issues and this supports our view that the EU system on VAT is not effective enough: Data coming from the Member States is not reliable; exchange of information among the Member States is not working properly; tax authorities do not cooperate effectively and the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) does not have competence to investigate cross-border VAT fraud, so it is an important issue. But we also have to point out the problems with the recovery rate because in 2014 it was at the level of 24% which is a historical lowest point and this has to change.

The second level of the protection of the financial interests of the EU is proper spending of EU resources. The Member States and the Commission have shared responsibility for implementing approximately 80% of the European Union’s budget so the Commission has a lot of things to do here. We need sound financial management while spending EU money and it should be combined with a ‘best use of every euro’ approach.

We accepted a new public procurement directive but it is also important to check its implementation. I also have to mention the corruption index in our report. I have to raise the issue of the biannual anti-corruption report of the Commission, which we are eager awaiting in Parliament and we hope that this year it is going to include the 29th Chapter on the EU institutions as well, and better protection for whistle-blowers in the European Union and in the Member States as whistle-blowers are a very important part of anti-corruption activity.

I think that we had very good cooperation together with the shadow rapporteurs. We have prepared a report which I believe can count on well founded grounds on your support in the vote.


  Kristalina Georgieva, Vice-President of the Commission. Madam President, on behalf of the Commission I would like to thank the Committee on Budgetary Control and in particular the rapporteur, MEP Benedek Jávor, for the 2014 Report on the Protection of the EU’s financial interests, and also to express our gratitude for the strong commitment of Parliament to the fight against fraud. We fully share this commitment and welcome the report’s analysis, as well as many very valuable recommendations which we will thoroughly follow up on.

Let me flag up some of the key recommendations and how we are going about them. First, reporting on irregularities. Parliament has requested, and rightly so, to improve the comparability of data reported by Member States so we can actually have a picture that is understandable and allows us to draw conclusions from it. We have adopted in 2015 a new regulation concerning reporting on irregularities and on that basis we have launched with the participation of national experts the preparation of new guidelines on reporting. On that basis, data would now feed a new improved version of the irregularities reporting systems and I am very pleased to inform you that we expect this new improved system to be operational in the second quarter of 2016.

Secondly, national anti-fraud strategies. As the rapporteur pointed out, we have obligations together with Member States. Member States are becoming increasingly more effective in fighting fraud and this is visible by the increase of detection and also prosecution of fraud cases: 1 649 cases overall. This is more than in 2013, but the recovery rate has to be beefed up, it has to be improved, and we believe that a lot more can be done in prevention, detection, reporting, prosecution and sanctioning if we are to have Member States embracing what Parliament is supporting very much, namely national anti-fraud strategies. So far this is not mandatory, it is voluntary. Five Member States have adopted such strategies. We encourage others to do it and we work already with those who have done it so we can actually improve the actions on the basis of exchange of best practices and experience.

Third, the rapporteur mentioned public procurement following the special report of the Court of Auditors on this issue, on public procurement. The Commission is looking at how to improve the functionalities of the irregularities management system which I mentioned, and the possibility to have interoperability between different databases so we can make best possible use of information and, of course, enhance transparency. We know that transparency is the taxpayers’ best friend, so the more we can do in this area, the better for the protection of the financial interests. There is a proposal to publish beneficiaries, and I want to clarify that the current legislation already foresees this and lists the type of information that needs to be published.

Fourth, corruption indicators. Concerning statistics and indicators on corruption in the Member States, there are significant differences in terms of definition and statistical recording practices, so we have to work on that over the medium term so we can have greater availability of corruption information, and I want to use this moment to respond. Yes, we are working on the biannual anti-corruption report so it will be available in 2016.

Fifth, the follow-up of OLAF recommendations at national level and the establishment of a European Prosecutor’s Office. We agree that comprehensive prosecution of crimes against the EU’s financial interests is essential and that more has to be done in Member States to follow up on OLAF’s recommendations and also to provide feedback to OLAF on actions taken. We think that the establishment of the European Prosecutor’s Office will help us in this regard and we also believe that the evaluation of Regulation 883/2013 governing OLAF’s investigations, to be completed by 2017, will provide an opportunity also in this regard. Like the rapporteur, we believe that VAT fraud should be part of the work of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, it should be covered by the PIF Regulation. We also believe that it is essential that the mandate of the EPPO is clear about that and that discussions between the co-legislators should be brought to a successful conclusion as soon as possible, so that we have the best possible EPPO we can design.

Finally, there has been a question in the committee on what we can do specifically on the independence of OLAF’s supervisory committee secretariat. I want to take the opportunity to report that on 4 March we have taken a decision in the Commission and we adopted a proposal for an amendment of the OLAF Regulation to transfer the Supervisory Committee secretariat to the Commission and we hope that there will be swift action by the legislator to adopt this proposal, so any appearance of a conflict of interests, any perceived conflict of interest can be eliminated. I thank Members for their attention and I look forward to the debate this evening.


  Sander Loones, Rapporteur voor advies van de Commissie internationale handel. Het is erg om belastinggeld te verspillen, maar het is een levende schande om te frauderen met belastinggeld. En daarover gaat het verslag dat wij vanavond bespreken. Ik heb er wel een aantal opmerkingen bij.

1. Ik roep de Commissie en het Bureau voor fraudebestrijding OLAF op om nog een tandje bij te zetten. Toen ik de bedragen zag in het verslag was ik enigszins verbaasd. Wij kennen toch allemaal de verhalen over fraude in het kader van bijvoorbeeld het cohesiebeleid of rond de landbouwsubsidies.

2. Mijns inziens zou dit verslag nog wat meer aandacht kunnen besteden aan preventie, want ook in het kader van fraude geldt dat voorkomen beter is dan genezen.

3. Tenslotte merk ik op dat het verslag pleit voor de oprichting van een nieuw Europees agentschap, nóg een Europees agentschap, een derde agentschap naast Eurojust en naast OLAF. En ik vraag mij oprecht af of dit echt nodig is en of dit niet veel efficiënter kan.


  Mercedes Bresso, relatrice per parere della commissione per gli affari costituzionali. Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, vorrei ricordare come il mantenimento della fiducia dei cittadini europei nelle istituzioni dell'Unione e la loro adesione al progetto di integrazione europea deve restare uno degli obiettivi principali al centro della politica di protezione degli interessi finanziari dell'Unione che la commissione persegue. La corruzione e la frode ai danni del bilancio dell'Unione sono direttamente proporzionali a una mancanza di trasparenza delle procedure di assegnazione e gestione e spesa dei fondi europei.

È necessaria quindi, a mio avviso, una netta distinzione tra la frode e l'errore e devono essere date informazioni tanto sulle frodi quanto sugli errori più frequenti, presentando anche esempi concreti, affinché gli utilizzatori dei fondi dell'Unione europea e le autorità di gestione siano meglio informati e sia quindi meglio possibile distinguere con nettezza fra la frode o l'errore, magari dovuto a difficoltà che cercheremo di temperare e ridurre con l'attività relativa al progetto "Legiferare meglio".

Ma, nel frattempo, credo che dare questa netta distinzione fra le due tipologie possa aiutare molto gli utilizzatori e anche permettere di trovare coloro che davvero sono dei frodatori.


  Julia Pitera, w imieniu grupy PPE. Pani Przewodnicząca! Obowiązkiem instytucji – zarówno europejskich, jak i narodowych – jest dbałość o pieniądze podatników. Muszą one stać na straży prawidłowego wydatkowania pieniędzy unijnych. Dlatego walka ze wszelkimi patologiami w tym obszarze musi stanowić priorytet, zwłaszcza że nadużycia finansowe i korupcja są źródłem finansowania przestępczości zorganizowanej oraz grup terrorystycznych – i co bardzo ważne – podważają zaufanie obywateli do instytucji publicznych oraz procesów demokratycznych. Wpływają też negatywnie na konkurencyjność Unii w gospodarce światowej. Zwalczanie nieprawidłowości i nadużyć finansowych utrudnia różnorodność systemów prawnych i administracyjnych państw członkowskich. działania Komisji muszą więc być intensywne i systematyczne. Skuteczne odzyskiwanie nienależnie wypłaconych z budżetu Unii środków, efektywniejszy pobór zasobów własnych oraz ustanowienie jednolitych zasad w zakresie sprawozdawczości to nieodzowne elementy skutecznych działań. Wyłaniane zaś do realizacji projekty powinny służyć wzrostowi gospodarczemu i tworzeniu miejsc pracy. Równocześnie Komisja powinna promować przepisy w sprawie ochrony osób zgłaszających nieprawidłowości, wspierać dostęp do informacji oraz przejrzystość działalności lobbingowej. Uzasadnione wątpliwości budzi natomiast propozycja wsparcia finansowego dla transgranicznego dziennikarstwa śledczego, które – otrzymując pieniądze budżetowe – utraci swą niezależność, a dziennikarze przy rozliczaniu dotacji będą musieli ujawniać, z jakich metod i środków korzystali. Na zakończenie chciałabym podziękować sprawozdawcy za dobrą współpracę.


  Georgi Pirinski, on behalf of the S&D Group. Madam President, I agree with the rapporteur that we have had a very useful process of preparing this report, and I do believe that the result is such as to contribute to the increasing confidence of citizens that their financial interests are being protected in the proper way. I would like to point out three items from our report and ask the Commissioner to comment.

The first has to do with the interruptions and suspensions. I believe it is very important to highlight what is in the report that these should be used in accordance with the relevant legal basis, and in the context, Madam Vice—President – something I find very important – is that you have adopted a new early warning mechanism. I would like to invite you to comment on the expectation for the creation of a comprehensive system of early detection and exclusion which the Commission is to propose. I fully agree with colleagues who have pointed out that prevention is the important element.

Secondly, the question of directly managed funds, Madam Commissioner: it is highly worrisome that there is a four-fold increase in the fraudulent irregularities in 2014, something which the Commission should provide a detailed explanation for and outline the action it will take. Thirdly, you highlighted the issue of correct reporting. I would only go along with colleagues and what is in the report that the situation now is highly unsatisfactory – we do not have a clear enough picture, so we very much rely on those efforts which you have pointed out to really make a change, even for next year’s report.


  Monica Macovei, în numele grupului ECR. – Doamnă președintă, în 2014, statele membre au raportat 1 650 de fraude, în valoare de 540 de milioane de euro. Despre această cifră vorbim și este numai pentru un an de zile! Aceștia nu sunt bani europeni în mod abstract, ci sunt banii cetățenilor europeni, sunt banii noștri. Comisia trebuie să-și asume integral răspunderea pentru recuperarea acestor bani. De asemenea, Comisia trebuie să mențină reguli stricte pentru întreruperea și pentru suspendarea plăților. Indicatorii pentru măsurarea corupției din statele membre trebuie folosiți. Asta este una din măsurile urgente minime care trebuie adoptate.

O altă măsură urgentă: protecția avertizorilor de integritate, a așa-numiților whistleblowers. Experiența celor care lucrează în instituții europene și care au dezvăluit ilegalități a fost de multe ori traumatizantă și, ca atare, sunt tot mai puțini astfel de avertizori de integritate, ceea ce pe noi ne face să pierdem bani. Trebuie modificat regulamentul și acești oameni trebuie protejați. O altă măsură: publicarea acordurilor cu companiile de tutun, cu toate companiile de tutun. Acordurile trebuie publicate ca să împiedicăm, în cea mai mare măsură în care putem, contrabanda cu tutun. De asemenea, cer ca acel „carusel al TVA-urilor” pentru fonduri europene să devină infracțiune în Directiva privind protecția intereselor financiare și să se oprească acest asalt al statelor membre, al majorității statelor membre care nu doresc ca acest carusel al TVA-urilor, fraudarea banilor europeni de TVA, să fie infracțiune.

De asemenea, o măsură obligatorie și urgentă este adoptarea Regulamentului privind Parchetul European. Toți banii noștri sunt în același coș și, dacă sunt furați într-un stat membru, se fură, de fapt, de la noi toți.


  Nedzhmi Ali, on behalf of the ALDE Group. Madam President, I would like first of all to congratulate the rapporteur, Mr Jávor, for the well done report, and thanks also to Commissioner Georgieva for her detailed statement. In real Europe, cases of fraud raise public attention and damage the reputation of the Union. It obliges us to ensure sound financial management and to put in place all necessary measures to protect the EU budget. The annual report of the Commission on the protection of the EU’s financial interests presents the functioning of preventive and corrective mechanisms and actions taken by the Commission services to protect the EU budget from illegal or irregular expenditure and irregularities related to their revenue.

While the EU and Member States are sharing responsibility for protection of the EU’s financial interests in fighting fraud, it is essential that the Commission and the Member States work together to protect effectively those interests. Here I can say that the Commission is working in that direction, as has been stated by Commissioner Georgieva. The report presents the real situation in the area of financial interests of the Union, to include the status of detection and reporting of irregularities, revenues and expenditures. Problems are also identified and a number of measures are presented in the areas of reporting and control. The Committee on Budgetary Control (CONT Committee) suggests the development of a system of indicators to measure the level of corruption in the Member States, amending the EU Staff Regulations to protect whistle-blowers and enhance transparency of lobbying. Among the policy areas considered at risk are public procurement, tobacco smuggling and counterfeit goods. The CONT Committee suggests enhancing cooperation among EU institutions to tackle fraudulent behaviour in the use of EU funds. Investigations and the role of OLAF are highlighted. Well-developed is a chapter related to performance-based budgeting and the value—for—money approach. Finally, it is important that anti-fraud measures are undertaken and should find the balance between control and the desire not to discourage beneficiaries. We need to secure not only a better revenue part of the budget ...

(The President cut off the speaker)


  Marco Valli, a nome del gruppo EFDD. Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, quando i governi, che si definiscono europeisti, devono adottare misure per proteggere gli interessi dei contribuenti europei, ecco che diventano immediatamente scettici e per spartirsi i soldi nell'ombra sono disposti a rimandare l'adozione di decisioni importanti in materia di cooperazione e scambio di informazioni e trasparenza, come quelle contenute nella direttiva sulla protezione degli interessi finanziari.

Non possiamo più accettare facili sprechi e frodi dei fondi europei a gestione regionale, la scarsa trasparenza della documentazione relativa ad appalti assegnati in modo diretto, autorità di controllo nazionali nominate dai controllati in conflitto di interesse, che queste ne certifichino la spesa e, soprattutto, la poca volontà dei governi di cooperare seriamente in materia di scambio di informazioni fiscali e bancarie. Questo punto è essenziale per combattere veramente la grande evasione ed elusione fiscale e il riciclaggio di denaro. Un recente rapporto di Eurodad vede il Lussemburgo di Juncker campione europeo al riguardo.

Ritengo infine scandalosa la mancanza di trasparenza sul progetto Torino-Lione, dove da diversi mesi numerosi deputati stanno chiedendo accesso alla documentazione relativa ai progetti finanziati con fondi europei ricevendo risposte negative. Sollecito la Commissione a dare risposte.


  Ελευθέριος Συναδινός ( NI). Κυρία Πρόεδρε, είναι σημαντικό να θεσμοθετούμε την ύπαρξη και τη λειτουργία υπηρεσιών και μηχανισμών για την καταπολέμηση της απάτης στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση σημαντικότερο όμως είναι να λαμβάνουμε υπόψη τα αποτελέσματα των εκθέσεων και των συμπερασμάτων για τη χάραξη πολιτικών και τους τρόπους αντιμετώπιση των κακώς κειμένων. Για παράδειγμα, είναι αυτονόητη και επιβεβλημένη η απλούστευση των κανόνων και διαδικασιών που αφορούν τις δημόσιες δαπάνες και τα έσοδα από ίδιους πόρους, ώστε να περιοριστούν οι μη δόλιες παρατυπίες, που για το 2014 ανέρχονται στο συνολικό ύψος των 362 και 176,2 εκατομμυρίων ευρώ αντίστοιχα .

Όμως αυτονόητη και επιβεβλημένη είναι η αναθεώρηση της απόφασης του Συμβουλίου και της Επιτροπής για την παροχή βοήθειας ύψους 3 δισ. ευρώ στην Τουρκία, όταν η έκθεση για την καταπολέμησης της απάτης επισημαίνει ότι αυτή αποτελεί το βασικό πρωταγωνιστή των εξόφθαλμων παρατυπιών που συνδέονται με τα κονδύλια προενταξιακής βοήθειας και κυρίως εκείνα που σχετίζονται με τη διασυνοριακή συνεργασία. Η Ένωση κινείται στα όρια της δολιότητας, όταν η υπηρεσία καταπολέμησης της απάτης κρούει τον κώδωνα του κινδύνου όσον αφορά στην αξιοπιστία της Τουρκίας. Οι ευρωπαϊκοί θεσμοί και οι ηγέτες των κρατών μελών πιστεύουν ακόμη ότι δίνοντας κονδύλια θα περιοριστούν οι μεταναστευτικές ροές στην Ευρώπη; Πόσοι ακόμη θέλετε να σας πουν ότι η Τουρκία είναι απατεώνας;


  Petri Sarvamaa (PPE). Madam President, first of all I would like to congratulate the rapporteur, Mr Jávor, on his very comprehensive work.

With the EU’s annual budget we are talking about roughly EUR 150 billion of taxpayers’ money. Citizens quite rightly want to know that this money is not being fiddled with. The bad news is that, in 2014, EUR 538 million of EU expenditure and revenue were affected by fraud. This is unacceptable and must be corrected. Controlling the use of money and punishing fraudulent acts is of the utmost importance.

To achieve this, at least three things have to be done. Firstly, the Commission must be as proactive as possible in following the use of our money. Secondly, the Member States must consequently be held more accountable for tracking the projects and providing correct data to the Commission. Thirdly, logically, the Member States must have a common goal in fighting fraud. This may eventually help achieve the long—unfulfilled objective of making the EPPO finally materialise. But these things need to be delivered, not just talked about here in Strasbourg, so I hope the Member States are listening. I know the Commission is.

(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question under Rule 162(8))


  Paul Rübig (PPE), Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“. Ich möchte an den Kollegen Sarvamaa eine Frage stellen. Wir haben ja derzeit OLAF. Was geht hier eigentlich schief, dass OLAF diese Leistung nicht erbringen kann? Warum brauchen wir hier dann eine neue Agentur, oder sollte man OLAF redesignen?


  Petri Sarvamaa (PPE), blue-card answer. Unfortunately, there was no interpretation, but my German is probably fluent enough to understand that you asked why we need another agency and when we already have OLAF, why we need the European Public Prosecutor’s Office. Greetings to my German teacher of 40 years ago! Well, as it is, OLAF does not actually have jurisdiction to deal with fraud inside the Member States, and only the national authorities have that right, but they cannot go over the border. So there is obviously a gap, and this is what I believe the Commission is trying to fill, and we have been waiting for this to happen for about 15 years. The time is now ready for that.


  Inés Ayala Sender (S&D). Señora Presidenta, tenemos una vez más, este año, el debate sobre un presupuesto que resulta cada vez más precario y cada vez con más presiones, más urgencias y más ambiciones. De ahí que le agradezca especialmente al señor Jávor que haya hecho un hincapié especial en la protección de los ingresos, que yo empecé hace un tiempo. Él lo ha dicho claramente: solamente en el año 2013 el fraude en relación con el IVA supuso 168 000 millones de euros, es decir, más que todo el presupuesto para 2016. Y es absolutamente imposible que eso se siga manteniendo.

De ahí que sea tan fundamental que, vía la OLAF ―pero, sobre todo, con la Directiva PIF, que debe incluir el IVA y debe aprobarse cuanto antes mejor―, exista esa posibilidad de luchar contra ese fraude que conlleva esas pérdidas multimillonarias para un presupuesto que necesita más.

(La Presidenta retira la palabra a la oradora)


  Jonathan Arnott (EFDD). Madam President, if this report is on the fight against fraud in the EU then we are losing. We have got billions a year in irregularities, the time lapse between detection and reporting is now three years, four months and on the way up, and we have got traditional own resources fraud up by 191% in a single year. We hear a lot about VAT fraud here, but actually part of the problem is that VAT is one of the most bureaucratic systems of tax collection known to humanity.

So we actually need to look at the problem rather than what always happens in this place, which is calls for more Europe, calls for the EU to get more involved in criminal justice, more involved with a Public Prosecutor’s Office at EU level. What an instructive example of the problem. Every problem: the solution is supposedly more and yet more EU. I will tell you one thing: if people back home in the UK knew what was really going on here, how much power this place really wants, they would vote on 23 June to leave for good.


  Tomáš Zdechovský (PPE). Paní předsedající, paní komisařko, děkuji kolegovi Benediktovi Jávorovi za předložený materiál. Z pozice PPE musím říci, že jde o velice kvalitní text.

Korupce je zásadním problémem a fenoménem, jenž se významně dotýká evropských finančních zájmů, a tím každého evropského občana. Ročně kvůli korupci a podvodům přijdeme o 120 miliard EUR. Obávám se, že boj proti korupci není jednoduchý ani jednoznačný. Je však zodpovědností nejen Komise, ale i každého členského státu, a to zdůrazňuji, podílet se na jejím potírání, jelikož korupce je na prvním místě stavem mysli a je třeba proti ní bojovat osvětou i tvrdými sankcemi.

Členské státy musí začít vynakládat s evropskými penězi více zodpovědnosti a efektivně se snažit zajistit cíl a maximální přidanou hodnotu evropských peněz. A v případě, že tyto peníze nejsou náležitě využity, musí být tvrdě sankcionovány.

Tato zpráva, kterou dnes v Parlamentu projednáváme, je vyvážený dokument, který nabízí kvalitní řešení, a byl bych rád, kdyby se všichni aktéři zavázali společnými silami toto řešení implementovat.


  Bogusław Liberadzki (S&D). Pani Przewodnicząca! Po pierwsze: za wartość uznaję fakt, że kształtujecie naszą wspólnotową świadomość potrzeby ochrony naszego wspólnego interesu finansowego. Ta świadomość wcale nie jest taka oczywista. Po drugie: fakt, że pokazujecie, że są finanse nasze wspólnotowe i finanse państw członkowskich oraz ochrona interesu na obu poziomach, jest zmierzaniem w tym samym kierunku, czyli w kierunku wspólnej ochrony interesu finansowego Unii jako całości. Kolejna rzecz: bardzo dużo spraw wcale nie będzie zależeć tylko i wyłącznie od pani, Pani Georgieva, lecz od Komisji jako całości i od nas wszystkich. Począwszy od tego – kiedy mówimy tu słusznie o dokonywanych wydatkach –, że jeżeli urzędniczo dalej będziemy uważali za cnotę, że lepiej jest wydać pieniądze z budżetu zamiast zainwestować, to będzie to problem. I proszę popatrzeć na stanowisko Trybunału Obrachunkowego: z 650 mln euro na lotniska, przynajmniej 125 mln euro milionów wydanych nieprawidłowo.


  Андрей Новаков (PPE). Винаги съм вярвал, че в тази зала трябва да вземат превес обективността и професионализмът над обикновените политически състезания. Нещо повече, щастлив съм, че и този доклад не сочи добри и лоши, а сочи нещо много повече – необходимостта от общ подход в контрола върху европейските средства.

Така както имаме общ подход в тяхното събиране и разпределение през европейските фондове, така ни трябва и общ подход в техния контрол. Нещо повече, щастлив съм, че правим разлика между грешка и между злоупотреби, защото голяма част от грешките се дължат на дългите и тежки процедури. Неслучайно много бенефициенти предпочитат да вземат заем вместо да отидат до европейските фондове. Ето защо ни трябват повече пари за техническа помощ, симплификация и по-прости и по-леки правила, така че хората да ги разбират и да могат да ги изпълняват без проблем.

Щастлив съм, че и моята държава е една от тези, които е посочена като пример, че докладва грешките още преди одит на Европейската комисия. Също е важно да кажем, че в предния мандат имаше много по-лоши резултати, що се отнася до контрол върху евросредствата и грешките, така че трябва да отчетем и работата на вицепрезидента Георгиева в тази посока за тези по-добри резултати.


  Zigmantas Balčytis (S&D). Gerbiama Pirmininke, gerbiama Komisijos Pirmininko pavaduotoja,

buvau 2010 m. ataskaitos dėl Europos Sąjungos finansinių interesų apsaugos pranešėjas, tačiau nuo to laiko sukčiavimo atvejų ir pažeidimų nesumažėjo, o padaugėjo, ir jau 2014 m. Europos Sąjunga dėl to neteko daugiau nei trijų milijardų eurų. Tačiau iki šiol iš valstybių narių susigrąžinama vis dar nedidelė neteisėtai išmokėtų piniginių lėšų dalis. Kaip jau esu minėjęs daugelį kartų, pagrindinė problema išlieka tai, kad valstybės narės, gaudamos iš Europos Sąjungos didžiules pinigines lėšas, nėra įpareigotos teikti išsamius ir palyginamus duomenis apie jų panaudojimą. Todėl būtina, kad Komisija suvienodintų ataskaitų apie sukčiavimo atvejus teikimo principus ir nustatytų aiškią duomenų teikimo sistemą, pagal kurią būtų galima spręsti, kaip valstybės narės įgyvendina OLAF atliktų tyrimų rekomendacijas bei numatytų sankcijas už jų nesilaikymą. Tokia situacija neturi būti toleruojama, todėl Komisijai būtina prisiimti pilną atsakomybę už neteisėtą išmokėtų Europos Sąjungos lėšų susigrąžinimą.


Interventions à la demande


  Jiří Pospíšil (PPE). Paní předsedající, já jsem se zájmem poslouchal celou rozpravu a také vystoupení paní komisařky. Je velmi dobře, že ta zpráva rozlišuje nesrovnalosti úmyslné a nesrovnalosti technické. Chci říci jednu věc, kterou osobně považuji za důležitou. Jako návrh řešení je zde předložen nový úřad - úřad evropského prokurátora.

Já jsem se, paní komisařko, v České republice deset let zabýval reformou české justice a musím říci, že vždycky téma tohoto úřadu u odborné veřejnosti naráželo na velký odpor. A jsem osobně přesvědčen, že trošku se zde blamujeme, že vytvoříme nový úřad a vyřešíme určitý problém.

Je totiž třeba jasně říci, že o pochybnostech a problémech dále budou rozhodovat národní soudy. To znamená, že evropský prokurátor bude možná dohlížet na zpracování žaloby, ale dále budou rozhodovat národní soudy, a proto je třeba posílit spolupráci mezi jednotlivými členskými zeměmi. To je podle mě důležitější, než zřízení nového úřadu.


  Maria Grapini (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, doamnă comisar, stimați colegi, consider raportul extrem de important, având în vedere nivelul de fraudă existent pe piața internă. Frauda generează corupție și corupția, evident, afectează statele membre, cetățenii, de fapt, din statele membre, creând costuri de sute de miliarde de euro anual.

Foarte grav este că, pe lângă diminuarea bugetelor naționale, corupția poate contribui la finanțarea activităților desfășurate de rețelele teroriste și corupția subminează, până la urmă, încrederea cetățenilor în democrație. Cred că este nevoie de îmbunătățirea controalelor, dar, doamnă comisar, cred că este mai importantă prevenția. S-a mai spus acest lucru. Este păgubos pentru cetățenii unui stat, atunci când se întrerupe finanțarea sau se suspendă plățile, pentru că, din cauza unei greșeli, suportă consecințele toți cetățenii țării. Cred că este nevoie de mai multă simplificare a procedurilor, pentru că sunt foarte multe erori, nu greșeli intenționate, în cheltuirea fondurilor și, bineînțeles, în raportările care se fac. Nu cred în instituții suplimentare. De aceea, nu susțin Parchetul European. Cred în prevenție foarte mult.


  Νότης Μαριάς ( ECR). Κυρία Πρόεδρε, σύμφωνα με την έκθεση, o προϋπολογισμός της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης μπορεί να διασφαλιστεί μέσω της OLAF, η οποία έχει ως ρόλο να εντοπίζει και να διερευνά περιπτώσεις απάτης και διαφθοράς καθώς και άλλες παράνομες δραστηριότητες. Ωστόσο το σύνολο των παρατυπιών που αναφέρθηκαν για το 2014 ανέρχεται περίπου σε 3,24 δισεκατομμύρια ευρώ, ενώ o δημοσιονομικός αντίκτυπος των παρατυπιών που δηλώθηκαν είναι κατά 36% μεγαλύτερος σε σχέση με το 2013. Επιπλέον, η OLAF, ενώ έχει συσταθεί από την Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση προκειμένου να πατάξει τη διαφθορά και την απάτη εντός των κρατών μελών της, δεν κάνει τίποτε για να συμβάλει επιβοηθητικά στην πάταξη της φορολογικής απάτης που λαμβάνει χώρα στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση καθώς και στις περιπτώσεις φοροδιαφυγής των πολυεθνικών εταιρειών σε φορολογικούς παραδείσους και τη μεταφορά κερδών τους σε αυτές. Είναι επομένως αναγκαίο η OLAF να συμβάλει πιο ενεργά κατά της φοροδιαφυγής των πολυεθνικών και να συμβάλει έμπρακτα στην καταπολέμηση κάθε παράνομης δραστηριότητας που πλήττει την Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση.


  Igor Šoltes (Verts/ALE). Čestitke kolegu Jávorju za dobro opravljeno delo in poročilo. Sam se bom dotaknil samo dveh problemov. Prvo: nedovoljena trgovina s tobakom je seveda globalni problem, zaradi katerega države članice EU letno izgubijo obsežne vsote javnih prihodkov, ocene kažejo, da tudi do 37 milijard EUR. Gre za to, da seveda tudi na ta način oškodujemo dobrobit evropskih davkoplačevalcev. In drugi je področje javnih naročil.

Zdi se mi, da iz leta v leto samo ponavljamo, da je na tem področju ogromno napak, nepravilnosti, samo mislim, da bi lahko tudi dobili izračune, koliko pravzaprav so učinki teh nepravilnosti na evropski proračun, in pa seveda tudi ukrepati, ampak sanje o generalnem evropskem tožilcu so seveda še daleč in do takrat seveda morajo več narediti tudi pristojni organi držav članic pri pregonu kriminala in korupcije na tem področju.


  Ivana Maletić (PPE). Gospođo predsjednice, poštovana povjerenice, u svom govoru istaknuli ste da je transparentnost najbolja prijateljica poreznih obveznika. Slažem se s vama i još bih dodala, najbolja prijateljica borbe protiv korupcije.

Zato je važno, da sad u 21. stoljeću javnosti omogućimo, i to sve države članice, da se klikom na internetu može doći do podataka o tome kome su isplaćena sredstva, tko su nositelji projekata i tko su dobavljači pružatelji usluga u projektima. To je ono što je bitno jer ćemo na taj način, tim mehanizmima spriječiti da oni koji su u sukobu interesa ulaze u korištenje javnog novca. Bojat će se i organizacija dog watch i reakcija naših građana.

Isto tako, Odbor za regionalni razvoj istaknuo je da je jako bitna edukacija i uspostava baze o nepravilnostima za kohezijsku politiku kako bismo mogli utvrditi učestalost vrsta nepravilnosti koje se pojavljuju, a posebno radi preventivnog djelovanja.

To su bitne poruke izvješća.


(Fin des interventions à la demande)


  Kristalina Georgieva, Vice-President of the Commission. Madam President, I would like to thank everyone very much for all the comments and suggestions they have made. I will try to answer everyone, especially those who have put forward questions to the Commission.

Let me start first with the role of prevention. As Mr Pirinski indicated, we are putting in place early warning systems that allow us to integrate different databases so that, as in the last intervention, we can actually see where money comes from and who the beneficiary is and then trace the route of the money. We now have multiple systems, and they do not always talk to each other, and that is a problem we are concentrated very much on resolving. In the budget focus for results initiative, we also want to create a way for us to see not only the movement of money, but also what we are getting for the money – what the benefit is, what the impact is. This will take time, but the efforts are structured and consolidated and, as I mentioned in my opening comments, already in the next quarter we will see some operationalisation of a better integration of these systems.

Secondly, there was a point made on the importance of separating irregularities and fraud. Of course, fraud is the most dangerous – it is cancerous in societies – but it is also the more difficult to catch, because in fraudulent activities there is usually a lot of effort and smart investment to hide what is being done. What does it mean for us? Two things: one, to simplify the rules so that it is more difficult to create misinformation, and that simplification certainly would not only reduce fraud but also would reduce irregularities. Secondly, in the analyses we do to sketch more clearly the lessons learned when we catch fraud, what does it mean in terms of the systems in place to prevent it from happening? Here comes the point on institutional capabilities. We are currently missing a hammer when we know from the work of OLAF that there is irregularity and, more importantly, there is fraud because we send the information back to national authorities and it is up to them. In countries where the legal system is strong, action is taken; in countries where there are difficulties in the legal system, it may not be taken. We know that people here recently reflected on only 24% being claimed back – this is, by the way, not only about fraud, but also about irregularity. Our thinking in the Commission was that, with the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, we will provide this extra hammer to go after fraud. We put forward the proposal, but unfortunately what we have seen is a watering down of the original proposal. We are concerned about it and have expressed our concerns, including the fact that VIP fraud now seems to be excluded from the mandate of the EPPO, which of course would mean a big chunk of potential abuse being out of action. Of course, it is for Member States to complete their deliberations on the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, but I would agree with those of you who have said that it has to be value added for us to fund it. We do not need institutions for the sake of institutions; we need them for effectiveness, for doing the right job.

There has been a very important point made that we are strong when we equip people with the opportunity to speak up. In that sense, protection for whistle—blowers is critical. We do it for staff in the Commission, and the question is: what more can we do to support Member States in enhancing their whistle-blower legislation? That is a conversation still to be had – what is our responsibility? We want to be sure, we want to be prudent, and we do not want to step out of line of what is our responsibility. We heard a comment that if we do not respect sovereignty and subsidiarity there could be more trouble than benefit, and we are, of course, very mindful of this.

Let me finish by saying that we hope next year will come, Mr Pirinski, with a very good analysis of why the level of fraud has gone up. Is it because we detect more, so we catch more, or is it actually bad news, because more is taking place? Hopefully we would already integrate that analysis into the action by the Commission.


  Benedek Jávor, rapporteur. Madam President, I would like to thank the Commissioner for her contribution and all the Members who participated in the discussion tonight for the lively debate. Very briefly I would like to say – as a short reaction to the different issues which were raised – that I believe that there are four basic elements in the fight against corruption and fraud in the European Union.

The first – and this links to the question of prevention – is full transparency. There is no fraud and there is no corruption if there is transparency. This is, for example, about the mandatory lobbying register in the EU, but there are also some worrying developments in the Member States regarding transparency. This is also about better reporting by the national authorities.

The second element is enhanced cooperation between the Member States. Mrs Macovei mentioned that it is impossible to fight against carousel fraud – VAT fraud – without good cooperation between the Member States and the Member State authorities, which is not happening right now.

The third element is strong institutions. When we talk about OLAF, of course we can criticise it, but OLAF cannot be effective without the rights it needs to be effective. That is why we need to strengthen OLAF, for example by checking how OLAF’s recommendations are respected in the Member States. We also need more institutions such as the European Public Prosecutor’s Office.

The fourth, and last, one is the question of sanctions. I think that there are serious shortcomings here in the European institutions. How can we make sanctions? How can we enforce that the Member States respect the rules we set up? This is essential. Without this there will be no effective fight against fraud and corruption.


  La Présidente. – Le débat est clos.

Le vote aura lieu mardi 8 mars 2016.

Déclarations écrites (article 162)


  Nicola Caputo (S&D), per iscritto. Stimolare una crescita economica sostenibile è obiettivo prioritario da raggiungere per mezzo di un'opera di risanamento e rigore di bilancio che contempli anche la lotta alla frode, in ogni sua manifestazione. Come ho evidenziato anche in altri miei interventi, la combinazione dei possibili strumenti politici deve essere affiancata dalla applicazione efficace della legislazione vigente e dal rispetto effettivo degli impegni internazionali, comprese le clausole antifrode e anticorruzione. Accolgo quindi positivamente la relazione annuale, dalla quale traspare che la strategia sulle politiche fiscali internazionali non sia disgiunta da un'azione coordinata a livello di UE. Devono essere potenziati i benefici del mercato interno anche per mezzo della pressione incessante su frode ed evasione fiscale. Va inoltre sviluppato, ai rispettivi livelli, l'uso di banche dati interconnesse sulle irregolarità nella politica di coesione, ivi comprese quelle degli appalti pubblici, e va rafforzata la sensibilizzazione di ogni organo istituzionale, a livello europeo, nazionale, regionale e locale. Deve cambiare il sentimento dell'opinione pubblica in generale. Mi associo inoltre alle preoccupazioni in merito alle perdite previste nell'ambito della riscossione dell'IVA nell'UE, valutate nel 2013 in 168 miliardi di euro, un livello ancora costante e insostenibile.


  Fabio Massimo Castaldo (EFDD), per iscritto. La difesa degli interessi finanziari dell'Unione deve essere una priorità ed è una questione che va affrontata in modo concreto ed efficace. Accanto infatti alle irregolarità, che costituiscono comunque un problema da affrontare anche tramite la semplificazione delle norme e procedure in modo che le stesse non possano più essere considerate un'attenuante, molto elevato è l'ammontare relativo alle frodi. Una buona parte di queste riguarda i fondi, ma la relazione presentata, che segue un impianto critico e attento a tutte le problematiche, sottolinea l'importanza crescente assunta dalle frodi all'IVA. In assenza di un sistema unico di prelievo, infatti, il mercato unico presta il fianco alle frodi cosiddette "carosello" che, nel 2013, già erano costate 168 miliardi di euro. A questo proposito la relazione richiede quindi a tutti gli Stati membri di partecipare in modo completo ad Eurofisc e di agevolare lo scambio di informazioni in merito, al fine di limitare progressivamente il problema. Il corretto utilizzo del denaro pubblico e il contributo equo di tutti i cittadini al bilancio sono di primaria importanza e continueremo quindi a tenere alta l'attenzione in materia.


  Pirkko Ruohonen-Lerner (ECR), kirjallinen. EU:n taloudellisten etujen suojaaminen ja petostentorjunta ovat tärkeitä toimivan talouspolitiikan osia. Haluaisin tässä yhteydessä nostaa esiin myös veronkierron, joka on yksi unionin vaikeimmista ongelmista. Otan käytännön esimerkin Suomesta. Caruna-niminen sähköverkkoyhtiö vältteli veroja kierrättämällä rahansa Alankomaiden kautta. 50 miljoonan euron voitoista maksettiin veroja Suomeen vain 800 000 euroa. Kun voitot oli häivytetty tilikirjoista, yhtiö ilmoitti kuluttajille nostavansa sähkön siirtohintoja vajaalla kolmanneksella. Tämä nostatti paljon kritiikkiä kansalaisten keskuudessa – ja täysin syystä. Halusin tuoda tämän tapauksen esille täällä parlamentissa, sillä ministerineuvoston pöydällä on parhaillaan toimenpidepaketti veronkierron estämiseksi. Toivon, että ministerineuvosto ei nyt vesittäisi komission ehdotusta. EU:n taloudellisten etujen suojaaminen vaatii petostorjunnan lisäksi myös veronkierron estämistä.

Aviz juridic - Politica de confidențialitate